The Supreme Court has acquitted a Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) bus driver who was convicted in a passenger death case arising from a 2011 incident in Karnataka. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish criminal negligence on the driver’s part and observed that he had merely acted on the conductor’s signal while operating the bus.
The bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra set aside the driver’s conviction under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, the incident took place on April 17, 2011, when the deceased woman, Shobha, was travelling in a KSRTC bus with her relatives. Near Mallayya Temple, the passengers intended to get down and the conductor signaled the driver to stop the bus.
The prosecution alleged that while Shobha was alighting, the driver moved the bus in a rash and negligent manner, causing her to fall and suffer fatal injuries. Based on the complaint, an FIR was registered against the driver.
The trial court convicted the driver and sentenced him to imprisonment. The conviction was later upheld by the appellate court and partly modified by the Karnataka High Court, which maintained the conviction under Section 304A IPC.
Court’s Observations
While examining the evidence, the Supreme Court placed significant reliance on the testimony of the bus conductor, who stated that he had first signaled the driver to stop the bus and later instructed him to move after passengers had alighted.
The Court observed that in a passenger bus, the conductor plays a crucial operational role and the driver normally depends on the conductor’s whistle or signal for stopping and restarting the vehicle.
“The driver of the bus… would depend upon the indications, signals or whistling from the conductor to monitor and regulate the movement of the bus,” the bench noted.
The Court further stated that it would be “unreasonable and illogical” to attribute negligence to the driver when he had acted in accordance with the conductor’s instructions.
Referring to earlier decisions on criminal negligence, the bench explained that rashness or negligence cannot be presumed merely because an accident occurred. The Court said the prosecution must establish a clear element of culpable negligence or recklessness.
The judges also observed that the possibility of the passenger slipping while getting down from the bus could not be ruled out.
“The deceased might have slipped while alighting from the bus because of her own movement being less than careful,” the Court said.
Decision
Setting aside the Karnataka High Court’s judgment, the Supreme Court held that the evidence on record did not prove that the driver acted in a rash or negligent manner.
The Court concluded that the driver could not be held criminally liable under Sections 279 and 304A IPC and ordered his acquittal. It also directed that he be released immediately if not required in any other case.
Case Details
Case Title: Mohammad Hanif Jainum Khalifa vs State of Karnataka
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 2902 of 2026
Judge: Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
Decision Date: May 27, 2026
